ArticleDrug and alcohol review2025
Understanding the Determinants of Use of the Australian Guide to Diagnosis of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder: Informing the Review, Development and Dissemination of New National Clinical Practice Guidelines.
Article in Drug and alcohol review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe Australian Guide to the Diagnosis of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD), developed in 2016, is currently under review. This study aimed to understand how the Guide is used in practice and identify factors influencing its implementation.
methodsA cross-sectional online survey was conducted with Australian health practitioners involved in the assessment and diagnosis of FASD. The Clinician Guideline Determinants Questionnaire was used. Quantitative data were summarised descriptively and content analysis was applied to open-ended questions.
resultsOf 333 survey sessions, 232 participants consented and 136 completed the survey. Most respondents were paediatricians (n = 54, 37%) or psychologists (n = 49, 33%). Although most clinicians felt confident using the Guide, only 44.1% agreed it clearly described the underlying evidence, and just 21% felt it adequately reflected patient preferences. Key enablers included clear, easy-to-follow guidance (n = 45, 36.3%); ease of access (n = 18, 14.5%) and familiarity with the Guide (n = 14, 11.3%). Common barriers were lack of access to appropriate clinicians, time and cost constraints (n = 25, 24.8%); concerns about the evidence base (n = 16, 15.8%); and lack of familiarity or skills (n = 8, 7.9%). DISCUSSION AND
conclusionsFindings highlight strong clinician engagement with the 2016 Guide but also identify areas for improvement, particularly around evidence transparency and alignment with person-centred care. By engaging with stakeholders and improving guidelines based on clinician feedback, we can improve the quality of care and support for individuals with FASD and their families.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.